STUDY REGARDING THE BUCKET-WHEEL …upet.ro/annals/mechanical/pdf/2016/Andras Iosif 2 - Anale 2016.pdf · the bucket wheel excavator. The existence of hard rock structures –in form

Annals of the University of Petroşani, Mechanical Engineering, 18 (2016), 11-22 11

STUDY REGARDING THE BUCKET-WHEEL

EXCAVATORS USED IN HARD ROCK EXCAVATIONS

IOSIF ANDRAS1, SORIN MIHAI RADU2, ANDREI ANDRAS3

Abstract: The machinery predominantly used for overburden removal as well as for

lignite and inter-bedded waste layers extraction in open pit coal mining operations in Europe, is

the bucket wheel excavator. The existence of hard rock structures –in form of continuous layers

or spread boulders, characterized by a much higher cutting resistance as the normal rock-

produces downtimes, increased equipment wear, or even severe damage of the bucket wheel

excavator’s structural components or operational subsystems, leading to increased energy

consumption, lower production rate and, finally, increased mining costs.

Keywords: BWE, hard inclusions, rocks, tools, boom, structure

1. GENERAL REMARKS

The present paper, based on some preliminary results of research performed in

the frame of BEWEXMIN - RFCS project aims at the development of solutions to

reduce failure rates of bucket wheel excavators working in these conditions. This

outcome can be achieved by developing methods for adaptation of already working

excavators to those conditions and prescription of standard requirements for newly

built ones, and on the other hand, a system of continuous surveillance of machinery

superstructure’s stresses, able to indicate in due time the emerging threats.

The above-mentioned project includes three main research tasks. The aim of

the first task is to define requirements to be set during bucket wheel excavator

construction in order to obtain as low as possible dynamic loads on the machine’s load

carrying structure in view to ensure a proper resistance. The present paper deals mainly

with the first issue, presenting the main implications between BWE parameters and the

adaptability to excavate hard inclusions.

1 Professor, Ph. D. Eng., University of Petroșani, [email protected] 2 Professor, Ph.D. Eng., University of Petroşani 3 Lecturer, Ph.D. Eng., University of Petroşani

Andras, I., Radu, S.M., Andras, A.

12

One of the frequent problems that need to be addressed when mining coal

deposits is the presence in the working face of cohesive materials having high

mechanical strength in relation to the average rock to be excavated. These are generally

called “hard formations” or “hard inclusions” and are in the form of either continuous

layers or boulders.

This problem is of particular importance in Europe where lignite deposits are

exploited in large opencast mines utilizing Bucket Wheel Excavators (BWEs) as the

main means of excavation.

Often it is difficult or impossible to excavate these hard inclusions with BWEs.

If their location has been previously determined by exploration, they are usually

blasted. But it is not uncommon to discover them when it is too late, that is when the

BWE actually digs into them. The actually operating of BWEs are designed to

excavate materials with an “earthy” texture with low mechanical strength. Dynamic

and stochastic impact loads exerted on the machine during these encounters are the

most common causes of major BWE component failures leading to downtime,

production disruption, and high-cost repairs.

The complexity and difficulty to address this issue is synthetized in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1. Logic scheme of the complex problem of excavating hard

formations/inclusions with BWE

Study Regarding the Bucket-Wheel Excavators Used in …

13

The basic components of a BWE (Fig. 2, a,b) which are subject of unwanted

effects produced while excavating these rock structures, belongs to the so called

superstructure, mainly the boom. The source of excessive loads is the interaction

between the working face and the bucket wheel’s working elements, the so-called

mining system. These components (teeth, buckets, BW, drive, boom, upper structure,

discharge boom), appear in principle in all BWEs, though, according to the specific

mine conditions, their individual design may diverge widely.

The geometric and dimensional features of the BWE have a large influence on

the scale and severity of damages produced as results of these unwanted effects.

a)

b)

Fig. 2. Typical BWE construction on working face (a) and associated technical drawing (b)


14

The existing BWEs can weigh up to 12500 t and excavate material from a

maximum bank height of about 50 m. The diameter of a bucket wheel (BW) varies

from 2.4 to 22 m and the nominal cutting rate varies from 200 to 12500 m3/h, in some

cases it can be as high as 20000 m3/h.

Even in the largest capacity BWEs the size of the buckets is relatively small,

compared to the size of the equipment (usually less than 5 m3), making them primarily

appropriate for mining unconsolidated materials.

The excavation is achieved by the sideward slewing of the bucket wheel

against the slope. This motion, which is essential for excavating over long distances, is

achieved by a long slewable boom (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3. Typical boom truss structure

The boom is fastened to a slewable superstructure by a pivot joint which is

mounted on the undercarriage. The superstructure, which consists of a high rigidity

platform and a tower which is seated on it, slews by means of a motor and gearbox. A

flexible suspension, which rapidly cuts out dynamic and impact loads, and a safety

clutch, which protects the motor from overloading caused by increased stresses exerted

during the excavation, ensure high reliability and longevity, as well as fatigue

durability.

In order to increase the cut range as high as possible above the track level, the

BW can be raised and lowered by means of this main boom.

The bucket wheel Fig.5.a is considered the basic component of the BWE. By

rotation it removes the material from the excavation face and discharges it onto the

conveyor belt that is located inside the main and the discharge boom. The design of the

BW is carried out having in mind the specific application as a whole, since the total

output of the machine is over time entirely dependent on it. Hence, BWs are typically

tailor-made according to the requirements of the mine in which they will be used.


15

The diameter of the BW affects the cutting speed, the bucket cutting force, the

BWE operating weight, the construction cost, and the cut geometry. (Fig.4)

Through the years the size of the BW was constantly increasing. The need for

larger-size BWs derives from the fact that the output of a BWE is proportional to the

BW diameter. However, when designing a large-diameter BW, factors such as the

operating weight and the cost of construction are of crucial importance.

Fig. 4. Forces acting on bucket wheel and saw like load due to bucket spacing

a) b).

Fig. 5. Typical bucket wheel (a) cutting height relative to BW diameter (b)

The selected cutting height usually varies from 50 to 70% of the BW diameter,

(fig. 5.b ) which is allowed by both the cutting resistance of the material, the filling of

buckets and the stability angle of the face slope. When selective mining has to be

implemented for the excavation of thin layers of material or when the cutting resistance

of the material is high, the cutting height can be less than 50% of the BW diameter,

resulting in lower output. The bucket is a steel structure, either pressed or welded,


16

which is mounted at the circumference of the BW. (fig. 6). The design of the bucket

should ensure the efficient filling with and discharging of the excavated material. The

shape of the bucket cutting edge can be rectangular, trapezoidal or circular. The bucket

cutting edge and teeth are made of heavy duty steel plate that is additionally armoured

with wear-resistant material on the cutting lip.

a) b)

Fig. 6. Typical bucket design 1 Tooth, 2 Lip, 3 shell, 4 attachments a) rounded b) rectangular

The part of the bucket that primarily comes in contact with the excavated

material is the side lip, as well as a part of the front lip, and the teeth mounted on them.

Most of the digging is carried out by the bucket corners, which in the cases of

rectangular or trapezoidal buckets are extended and well armoured against wear. When

the excavated material is highly abrasive, additional teeth are placed on the cutting lips,

either by bolts or by wedges, in order to further protect the lips from wear.

The excavated material has a fluid-like behaviour, filling the bucket when the

cutting edge reaches the horizontal position. If the terrace height is shorter than the

radius of the BW, the optimum utilization of the bucket capacity cannot be achieved.

Regarding the discharge of the excavated material, it should take place while the BW

passes over the discharge area.

Fig. 7. a) Chain mat instead of shell of buckets b) bucket with corner cutters for soft material

1

1

2

5

4

3


17

In the case of very sticky materials, special consideration is required in order to

ensure discharging from the bucket, as they tend to adhere to the walls. It is common to

use chain mats, as those shown in Fig.6, which push the material out due to their

deadweight. The effectiveness of the chain mats reduces as the rotational speed

increases, resulting in increasing the centrifugal force

Additional cutters are installed when the size of the excavated material lumps

has to be reduced. These pre-cutters are attached in the periphery of the BW body and

between the actual buckets.

Preventing large lumps from entering the buckets and the conveyors can also

be achieved by reducing the space between the back and the lip of adjacent buckets,

either by lengthening the back of the buckets, or by increasing their number on the

BW.

The maximum value of the cutting speed occurs at the outer region of the BW,

reducing while moving towards the centre of it. Since the difference between the speed

in the region of the cutting edge and the periphery of the BW is considered

insignificant, the circumferential speed of the BW’s outer edge can be assumed to be

the cutting speed of the bucket.

The BW circumferential speed should ensure that the centrifugal force acting

on the excavated material will be not more than one third of its gravitational force, so

that the effect of gravity will be sufficient enough to allow for bucket discharge. There

is a critical circumferential speed over which emptying of the bucket does not occur. A

relationship between the critical circumferential speed at which the material is retained

in the bucket wheel and the diameter of the BW has been demonstrated.

The key parameters affecting bucket discharge, and thus the circumferential

cutting speed, are associated with the specifications of the BW and the buckets, as well

as the properties of the excavated material (i.e. the size of the excavated material, the

free flow angle, the internal friction angle, the coefficient of friction etc.). The selected

circumferential speed should not exceed 55% of the critical circumferential speed

ensuring that: (i) the centrifugal force will not reduce the effect of gravity on bucket

discharge, and (ii) the duration of the BW passage over the discharge area will be

sufficient to ensure the total discharge of the bucket.

As is known, the depth of the cut varies along the horizontal arc of the

excavated face. To counterbalance this cutting depth variation, the slewing speed is

adjusted accordingly. Current BWEs are capable of automatically changing the slewing

speed of the boom as a function of the angle that is defined by the boom and the axis of

face advancement, by the so-called cosine steering. The typical maximum slewing

speed is approximately 1 m/s.

As a general rule, in order to keep the output of the BWE as high as possible,

large slewing angles should be avoided. Additionally, in order to ensure good bucket

filling, the slewing speed should be selected in regard to the circumferential speed and

the cutting height.

The diversity of the mechanical properties of the excavated material, the

volume and the cutting contour of the bucket, the shape and the condition of bucket


18

teeth, and the bucket cutting speed, are only few of the numerous parameters

determining the energy required for the excavation of a material. To date there is no

reliable method to calculate the cutting resistance of a material, i.e. the force required

to excavate it.

Laboratory tests can only be used as an initial indicative guideline for a

specific material since there is a scale effect and the results significantly vary

depending on the size and geometry of the test sample. Sufficient information about the

cutting resistance of materials already excavated in an existing mine can be derived

from machine operational data, but it is difficult to correlate measured power with

other parameters, because the measured power available for excavation is directly

correlated to the BW drive motors power. However, only part of this power is actually

consumed for excavation. In order to calculate the power available for excavation, first,

the power required for lifting the material to a height of about half the BW diameter

should be deducted from the total installed motor power. The remaining power is

consumed by the cutting resistance, the frictional, and the inertial forces. These last

ones can be determined only by theory issued formulas, so the vicious circle is closed.

The truth is somewhere at middle.

2. ADAPTATION OF BWE AND TECHNOLOGICAL PARAMETERS

IN VIEW TO IMPROVE EXCAVATION OF HARD INCLUSIONS

The effect of the cutting resistance on the dynamic behaviour of the BWE is

crucial. The occurrence of hard inclusions that are difficult to excavate has a

substantial influence on the operation of a BWE. The dynamic and stochastic impact

loads exerted on the machine, while performing heavy duty operations, are the most

common causes of BWE failure.

In the definition of mining resistance of excavated rocks, known as Cutting

resistance, a parameter at the boundary of intrinsic rock mechanical parameters are

now a subject of debates among specialists. In our approach, for the project’s

purpose’s, the issue is to select- find the best metric to be used applicable for –“normal

“resistance, “excessive” resistance both in case of continuous layers (insertion) in

excavated block and “accidental “ excessive resistance occurred when unexpected

intercalations or boulders appears in the excavated face responsible of impulsive loads.

In the literature and BWE design and construction practice three kind of metrics are

used:

A) specific cutting resistance k which is related to

1) length of cutting edge-KL, in kN/m

2) cross section of chip- KF, in kN/m2and

B) depth of cut (height of chip) Kh, in kN/m.

C) specific cutting energy ws, which is expressed in energy/volume and SI

units in MPa. It is confirmed that a good linear correlation exists between ws and UCS.

A1 is used mainly in German literature; it has as historical origin in first use of

Bucket Wheel machines in reclaiming/loading of bulk material purposes. On our


19

opinion, this metric is suitable for actual BWEs only for soft rocks, and generally

appropriate for loaders/ reclaimers, with buckets without teeth (with lips only) and very

good for tools with large width, such as dredges and bulldozers.

A2 is preferred by majority of specialists, but, it is really an alternative of the

specific cutting energy, hidden behind other unities of measure. So it is at least

redundant, if not useless taking into account that it is relatively invariant on

technological factors.

For BWEs the average values of KL and KF are utilized for calculating the

cutting force acting on an entire bucket when Kh allow calculating the cutting force on

individual tooth considering the geometry of chip as resulting from geometry and

kinematic of bucket wheel, boom and bucket.

In past years, we determined on hundreds of samples of lignite and overburden

rocks covering the entire coal field of Oltenia, the four parameters. Our opinion after

analysing the great amount of results is that the pair Kh and ws are the most appropriate

for accurate estimation of cutting forces starting from individual teeth towards bucket

and wheel (bottom to top or element to ensemble approach) because the number of

teeth in contact with the rock and number of buckets involved in excavation is variable

during a unitary cut and a block cut. This approach is more relevant to analyse and

highlight the variability of load on wheel, which exists even in rock with “normal”

resistance and increases dramatically in two cases of encountering “excessive”

resistance.

If the extent of the hard inclusions is large, their occurrence is foreseen,

blasting or other types of machines should be used for their excavation. In the case of

small-size hard inclusions, the BWE can expose and push them down onto the crawler

level. When the size of bucket is larger than the size of the inclusion, it is transferred

with the flow of material on the conveying line, and produces damages on this

segment. During the actions of handling these events, no actual production takes place,

thus the average output of the BWE reduces.

In order to excavate hard inclusions, the operator of the BWE has to reduce the

circumferential speed of the BW (which is technically possible only at last generation

BWEs), the slewing speed of the boom, and the depth of the cut. All these if possible to

be performed, lead to additional unproductive times.

The adaptation of the cutting parameters to the properties of the excavated

material results in the variation of the BWE’s performance.

Heavy design BWEs are reported to excavate boulders and layers of hard

material with a thickness of up to 600 mm. However, the machines do not directly cut

such hard material but rather break it into smaller pieces manageable by the material

handling system. Material with a compressive strength of 70 to 140 MPa is reported to

be excavated in this manner.

Natural tendency of permanently improving performances of BWE, especially

in term of capacities, has not been adequately followed by calculation methods. A good

proof of this is relatively frequent damaging of BWE. Non–allowed deformations and

fractures of BWE subassemblies are primarily caused by lack of compliance while


20

analysing real dynamic loads.

Oscillations of excavating structure (bucket wheel + boom + boom suspension

(ropes) appears even during excavation process in “normal resistance” rocks. Because

the rocks excavated in open pit lignite mines are non-homogenous, the excavating

forces have a double kind of stochastic variability in time. A quasi-periodic variation

due to successive entrance/exit in/from operation of buckets, progressive loading with

excavated material of buckets and sudden unloading superimposed with a random

fluctuation of cutting forces.

The increased tendency of bucket-wheel excavators to oscillations is found by

[4] to be associated with the characteristics of the oscillatory system, mainly in terms

of low dissipative (damping) capacity the permanent excitation from the bucket wheel

– rock interaction. An interesting analysis regarding the positive feedback loop effect

explained by increase of summary cutting force vertical component acting on bucket

wheel, produced by the vertical oscillation of excavation system, which in some cases

lead to increasing oscillation’s amplitude, a.s.o.

This analysis may provide solutions of effective suppression of different

oscillations by dissipation of the energy of the oscillatory system directly in the cutting

process, as requirements on both the design and the operational parameters of the

cutting equipment.

Thus, it has been established that efficient suppression of bucket-wheel

excavator tendencies to oscillations in a vertical plane and a decrease in the working

unit oscillation amplitude to a safe level even in the regime of a power resonance can

be achieved by damping the system with forces which, in case of a corresponding

design of cutting equipment, are formed directly in the process of pit face cutting.

This solution is simple and “ideal” as the excavator operating system takes

upon itself the function of a damper and, simultaneously, the ability of the main system

to perform the task for which the excavator is intended improves. It is shown in [3] that

cutting equipment with technically sharp self-sharpening teeth mounted on buckets at

the angle = 0 simultaneously ensures suppression of rotor oscillations in the pit face,

a decrease in excavation power intensity and rotor drive loading by 40–45%, and a

decrease in the side cutting force and rotation drive load by 2.5–3 times. As a result,

the productivity of machines drastically increases and their reliability and operational

effectiveness improve.)

3. CONCLUSIONS

The continuous layers of hard formations cannot be generally excavated by

BWEs. For their excavation are required loosening operations by pre-excavation

blasting works or the use of other types of machines, such as impact rippers, classic

excavator and others.

Seldom occurrences of boulders or short veins generally are managed by

auxiliary measures. A common finding is that small (dimension less than bucket

volume are not excavated in proper sense, but they are removed from soft embedding


21

rock. Even in this case, they produce unwanted effects on mining system of BWE.

In some cases, as reported in [7] when such a formation is encountered it

causes lateral deflection of cutting system which can produce lateral (horizontal)

excitations on the excavator’s structure oscillation.

As a general remark, the aggressiveness against proper operation and structural

safety of BWE of regular, well known continuous layers of hard formations is as

important as the sudden encountering of small extent and much unknown hard

boulders. The difference is as in risk theory frequency of occurrence vs. extent of

damages produced.

The boulders are of different shape and sizes (from irregular to round and from

0.1 to 15 m) as well as of different mineralogical compositions. They are embedded in

a matrix material consisting of claystones, sands, gravel and loam (the overburden of

the lignite deposit).

Their density ranges from 2200 to 2700 kg/m3, and their compressive strength

from 10-143 MPa. These large variations, especially for the compressive strength,

determines specific dynamic and stochastic impact loads acting on the BWEs for each

mine that must be studied more thoroughly.

In most cases the BWEs can handle boulders ranging from 0.5 up to 1 m in

size (depending on their mineralogical composition and strength). The larger ones

usually require blasting works or mechanical disaggregation (using other machines).

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The actual paper is supported by the European Union Research Found for Coal

and steel by the research project RFCR-CT-2015-00003-BEWEXMIN „Bucket wheel

excavators operating under difficult mining conditions including unmineable inclusions

and geological structures with excessive mining resistance”.

REFERENCES

[1]. Rasper, L., The Bucket Wheel Excavator: Development - Design - Application,

Clausthal-Zellerfeld: Trans Tech Publications

[2]. Vołkov, D.P., Czerkasov,V.A., Dinamika i procznosc mnigokovszovych ekskavatorov i

otvałoobrazovatejej. Moskva: Maszynostrojenie, 1969.

[3]. Kovacs I., Nan M., Jula D., Tomus O.B., New buckets mounted on rotor excavators as

a result of dislokation tested process. International Conference on Applied Computer

Science, Malta 2010.

[4]. Bošnjak Srđan, Zrnić Nenad, Oguamanam Donatus - On the dynamic modelling of

bucket wheel excavators, FME Transactions (2006) 34, 221-226.

[5]. Chudnovskii, V.Yu. - Study of Dynamic Properties of Bucket-wheel Excavator Designs,

Gornoye oborudovaniye i elektromekhanika , 2006, no. 1, pp. 27–32.

[6]. Chudnovskii, V.Yu. - Principles of Designing Self-sharpening Equipment for Bucket-

wheel Excavators, Ugoli 2006, no. 2, pp. 16–20.

[7]. Robrecht M. Schmitz, Excavation of rock concretions in Hambach opencast mine: In

situ tests 11th Congress of the International Society for Rock Mechanics - Ribeiro e


22

Sousa, Olalla & Grossmann (eds) Taylor & Francis Group, London, ISBN 978-0-415-

45084-3

[8]. Raaz, V., Optimierung der maschinen- mid Verfahrenrechnischen Parameter von

Schaufelradbaggem für einen abbau von harteren Materialen ím Tagebau. Braunkohle in

Europa: Innovationen für die Zukunfl; 1. Internationale Konferennnz, 29.Marz bis 1.

Aprili 2000. in Freiberg, Tagungsband

[9]. Sümegi, I., Kűlfejtési marótárcsás kotrógépek jövesztő szerkezetének elméleti vizsgàlata

és fejlesztése. Doktori értekezés, Universitatea din Miskolc, 2002

[10]. Durst W., Vogt V., Bucket Wheel Excavator. Trans Tech Publications, Clausthal-

Zellerfeld, Vol. 7, FRG, 1988

[11]. Rodenberg J.F., Contribution to the Assessment of the Specific Cutting Force for

Bucket Wheel Excavators. Continuous Surface Mining. Trans Tech Publications, Vol.

1, No.1-3/87, Clausthal, Germany, 1987.

[12]. Lu Zhonglin, Beitrag zur Festlegung der Auslegungs- und Betriebsparameter von

Schaufelradbaggern durch Untersuchung ihrer Einflüsse auf das effektive

Fördervolumen und den Energieverbrauch sowie durch Untersuchung des

Entlehrungsvorganges des Fördergutes., Dissertation, TH Aachen, 1983.

[13]. Dr.-Ing. Viktor Raaz, Assessment of the Digging Force and Optimum Selection of the

Mechanical and Operational Parameters of Bucket Wheel Excavators for Mining of

Overburden, Coal and Partings, Krupp Fördertechnik GmbH

Documents

STUDY REGARDING THE BUCKET-WHEEL …upet.ro/annals/mechanical/pdf/2016/Andras Iosif 2 - Anale 2016.pdf · the bucket wheel excavator. The existence of hard rock structures –in form